Abstract
Direct manipulation is now the norm in software design. As a result this paradigm will feature significantly in the educational use of software. While the success of direct manipulation — providing the rationale for the development of easy to use, intuitive interfaces — is well rehearsed, it should be remembered that the aims of educational software go beyond simply presenting easy to use interfaces. The educational use of software has the grander aim of supporting cognition. In this paper a research study into human computer interaction issues, concerned with the design of a direct manipulation educational software package, is briefly described as a basis for considering the use of direct manipulation in the design of educational software. Four design paradoxes are identified which illustrate the potential conflict between educational issues and the use of direct manipulation.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Squires, D.J. (1994) A Comparison of Learner and Designer Models in the Use of Direct Manipulation Educational Software in the Context of Learning About Interacting Variables in Photosynthesis. PhD, University of London.
Squires, D.J. (ed) (1991) Bioview. King’s College London, London.
Card, S.K., Moran, T.P. and Newell, A. (1983) The Psychology of Human Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
Olson, J.R. and Olson, G.M. (1990) The growth of cognitive modelling in human-computer interaction since GOMS. Human-Computer Interaction, 5 (2 & 3) pp. 221–265.
Gugerty, L. (1993) The use of analytical models in human-computer-interface design. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, pp. 625–660.
Hutchins, E.L., Hollan, J.D. and Norman, D.A. (1986) Direct Manipulation Interfaces in User Centred System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction (eds. D.A. Norman and S.W. Draper), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 87–124.
du Boulay, B., O’Shea, T. and Monk, J. (1981) The black box inside the glass box: presenting computing concepts to novices. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 14, pp. 237–249.
Grudin, J. (1989) The case against user interface consistency. Communications of the ACM, 32(10) pp. 1164–1173.
Draper, S.W. (1986) Display Managers as the Basis for User-Machine Communication, in User Centred System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction (eds. D.A. Norman and S.W. Draper), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 340–352.
Norman, D. (1991) Cognitive Artifacts, in Designing Interaction: Psychology at the Human-Computer Interface (ed. J.M. Carroll), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 17–38.
Birnbaum, I. (1990) The assessment of IT capability. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 6 (1) pp. 88–97.
Lucas, A.M. and Tobin, K. (1987) Problems with “control of variables” as a process skill. Science Education, 71(5) pp. 685–690.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Squires, D. (1995). The use of direct manipulation in educational software design. In: Tinsley, J.D., van Weert, T.J. (eds) World Conference on Computers in Education VI. WCCE 1995. IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-34844-5_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-34844-5_28
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-1714-0
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-34844-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive